Additional Coverage:
Martha-Ann Alito, the spouse of Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito, expressed a desire for retribution against individuals who criticized her and her husband for displaying controversial flags at their residence. During a captured conversation at the Supreme Court Historical Society’s annual dinner on June 3, Martha-Ann Alito made it clear she wasn’t one to back down, stating, “You come after me, I’m gonna give it back to you.”
Her assertive comments emerged from a private talk recorded by Lauren Windsor, a progressive filmmaker who infiltrated the event by presenting herself as a conservative. Windsor, under her real name but with concealed intentions, sought to draw out responses from Alito and other attendees. These recordings were later shared on MSNBC and Windsor’s platform, The Undercurrent, marking another instance of leaks following earlier revelations involving Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Alito by Rolling Stone.
The controversy centers on the Alito household’s display of an “Appeal to Heaven” flag and an inverted American flag, icons linked to far-right ideologies and the January 6 Capitol riots. Despite the political connotations, Alito defended the flag’s presence as a personal counter to an attack by a neighbor, a claim met with skepticism.
This situation prompted Democratic lawmakers to call for Justice Alito’s recusal from cases related to the January 6 events. Adding to the controversy, Martha-Ann Alito disclosed plans to fly a “Sacred Heart of Jesus” flag as a counter-protest to an LGBTQ Pride flag in their vicinity, a gesture associated with Christian conservative protest.
Despite her husband’s requests to refrain from displaying contentious flags, Martha-Ann Alito intends to resume her flag protests once free from current constraints, even considering a custom flag that declares “shame” in Italian, targeting the Pride flag’s display.
Furthermore, recorded dialogues from the event revealed Justice Alito’s agreement with the notion of the U.S. as a Christian nation and acknowledged political influences on court decisions, contrasting with Chief Justice Roberts who did not share these views.
Windsor defended her covert recording strategy to The Hill, citing the Supreme Court’s opaque nature and a perceived lack of accountability amidst evidence of ethical violations.